- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:14, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Disney Princess: Magical Dress-Up ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
With only one proper review from a non-notable source (the IGN link contains no content other than saying the game exists), this game has not had significant commentary written about it and does not satisfy WP:NVG. pinktoebeans (talk) 14:02, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. pinktoebeans (talk) 14:02, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. pinktoebeans (talk) 14:02, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
- Delete - Searching comes up with only one borderline RS but nothing else aside from basic database-related listings of this game. No WP:SIGCOV. -- MuZemike 16:40, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
- Weak delete. Scholar returns just a single Korean paper which is open access but not OCRed so not translatable to judge the extent of the coverage. Books has one possible review here [1] but snippet view ruins the access and I cannot judge if this is SIGCOV or not. Right now it doesn't appear notable, but I am open to revisiting sources.
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:41, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:14, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Disney Princess: Magical Dress-Up ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
With only one proper review from a non-notable source (the IGN link contains no content other than saying the game exists), this game has not had significant commentary written about it and does not satisfy WP:NVG. pinktoebeans (talk) 14:02, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. pinktoebeans (talk) 14:02, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. pinktoebeans (talk) 14:02, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
- Delete - Searching comes up with only one borderline RS but nothing else aside from basic database-related listings of this game. No WP:SIGCOV. -- MuZemike 16:40, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
- Weak delete. Scholar returns just a single Korean paper which is open access but not OCRed so not translatable to judge the extent of the coverage. Books has one possible review here [1] but snippet view ruins the access and I cannot judge if this is SIGCOV or not. Right now it doesn't appear notable, but I am open to revisiting sources.
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:41, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.